Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:29:12.101Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pictures, Pluralism, and Feminist Epistemology: Lessons from “Coming to Understand”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2020

Letitia Meynell
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Meynell's contention is that feminists should attend to pictures in science as distinctive bearers of epistemic content that cannot be reduced to propositions. Remarks on the practice and function of medical illustration—specifically, images Nancy Tuana used in her discussion of the construction of ignorance of women's sexual function (2004)—show pictures to be complex and powerful epistemic devices. Their affinity with perennial feminist concerns, the relation between epistemic subject and object, and the nature of social knowledge, are of particular interest.

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 23 , Issue 4 , December 2008 , pp. 1 - 29
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alcoff, Linda, and Dalmiya, Vrinda. 1993. Are “old wives”’ tales justified?. In Feminist epistemologies, ed. Alcoff, Linda and Potter, Elizabeth. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Amundson, Ron, and Lauder, George V. 1998. Function without purpose: The uses of causal role function in evolutionary biology. In The philosophy of biology, ed. Hull, David and Ruse, Michael. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Babbitt, Susan. 1996. Impossible dreams: Rationality, integrity, and moral imagination. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Baigrie, Brian, ed. 1996. Picturing knowledge: Historical and philosophical problems concerning the use of art in science. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barad, Karen. 2007. Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Bies, John. 1987. Industrial drafting: Principles, techniques, industry practices. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Biology and Gender Study Group. 1988. The importance of feminist critique for contemporary cell biology. Hypatia 3 (1): 61–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boston Woman's Health Book Collective. 2005. Our bodies, ourselves: A new edition for a new era. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Campbell, Sue. 1997. Interpreting the personal: Expression and the formation of feelings. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Cartwright, Nancy. 1999. The dappled world: A study of the boundaries of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fausto‐Sterling, Anne. 2000. Sexing the body: Gender politics and the construction of sexuality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Federation of Feminist Women's Health Centers. 1981. A new view of a woman's body: A fully illustrated guide. Illustrations by Suzann Gage. Photographs by Sylvia Morales. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Files, Craig. 1996. Goodman's rejection of resemblance. British Journal of Aesthetics 36: 398–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedberg, David. 1998. Iconography between the history of art and the history of science: Art, science, and the case of the urban bee. In Jones and Galison, Picturing science, producing art.Google Scholar
Giere, Ronald. 1988. Explaining science: A cognitive approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giere, Ronald. 1996. Visual models and scientific judgment. In Baigrie, Picturing knowledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gombrich, E. H. 1963. Meditations on a hobby horse. In Meditations on a hobby horse, and other essays on the theory of art. London: Phaidon Press.Google Scholar
Gray, Henry. 1878. Anatomy, descriptive and applied, ed. Holmes, Timothy. 8th ed. London: Longmans, Green.Google Scholar
Gray, Henry. 1887. Anatomy, descriptive and applied, ed. Pick, T. Pickering. 11th ed. Philadelphia: Lea Brothers and Co.Google Scholar
Gray, Henry. 1893. Anatomy, descriptive and applied, ed. Pick, T. Pickering. 13th ed. London: Longmans, Green.Google Scholar
Gray, Henry. 1923. Anatomy, descriptive and applied, ed. Howden, Robert. 22nd ed. London: Longmans, Green.Google Scholar
Haraway, Donna J. 1991. Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hesse, Mary. 1966. Models and analogies in science. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Hodges, Elaine R. S. ed., 2003. The guild handbook of scientific illustration. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Jaggar, Alison. 1992. Love and knowledge: emotion in feminist epistemology. In Gender/Body/Knowledge, ed. Jaggar, Alison and Bordo, Susan. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Jones, Caroline, and Galison, Peter, eds. 1998. Picturing science, producing art. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1985. Reflections on gender and science. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Kemp, Martin. 1996. Temples of the body and temples of the cosmos: Vision and visualization in the Veselian and Copernican revolutions. In Baigrie. Picturing knowledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kimber, Diana Clifford, Gray, Carolyn E., Stackpole, Caroline E., Leavell, Lutie C., and Miller, Marjorie A., eds. 1966. Anatomy and physiology, 15th ed. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kosslyn, Stephen M. 1995. Mental imagery. In Visual cognition: An invitation to cognitive science, Vol. 2, 2nd ed., ed. Kosslyn, Stephen M. and Osherson, Daniel N.Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meynell, Letitia. 2008. Why Feynman diagrams represent. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 22 (1): 39–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, Lisa Jean, and Clarke, Adele E. 1995. Clitoral conventions and transgressions: Graphic representations in anatomy texts, c. 1900–1991. Feminist Studies 21 (2): 255–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, Margaret, and Morgan, Mary. 1999. Models as mediators. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nesbitt, Richard, and Ross, Lee. 1980. Human inference. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice‐Hall.Google Scholar
Nersessian, Nancy. 1988. Reasoning from imagery and analogy in scientific concept formation. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Vol. 1, Contributed Papers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nersessian, Nancy. 1992. In the theoretician's laboratory: Thought experimenting as mental modeling. In PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Vol. 2, Symposia and Invited Papers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrett, D. I. 1992. Organization and functions of cells responsive to faces in the temporal cortex. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 335 (January 29): 23–30.Google ScholarPubMed
Perini, Laura. 2005. The truth in pictures. Philosophy of Science 72 (January): 262–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, Alan. 1998. Sexing the body: Representations of sex differences in Gray's Anatomy, 1958 to the present. Body & Society 4 (1): 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter, Elizabeth. 1993. Gender and epistemic negotiation. In Alcoff and Potter, Feminist epistemologies.Google Scholar
Rathus, Spencer A., Nevid, Jeffrey S., and Fichner‐Rathus, Lois 1993, 2000, 2002. Human sexuality in a world of diversity, 5th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
Rosen, Raymond, and Rosen, Linda Reich. 1981. Human sexuality. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Tuana, Nancy. 2004. Coming to understand: Orgasm and the epistemology of ignorance. Hyparia 19 (1): 193–232.Google Scholar
Van Fraassen, Bas. 1980. The scientific image. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, Kendall. 1990. Mimesis as make‐believe: On the foundations of the representational arts. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Willats, John. 1997. Art and representation: New principles in the analysis of pictures. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Winter, Irene. 1998. The affective properties of styles: An inquiry into analytical process and the inscription of meaning in art history. In Jones and Galison, Picturing science, producing art.Google Scholar